Kill the bots: FTC puts a bounty on the heads of robo-telemarketers

FTC has offered $50,000 for a technical cure to the robocall plague.

The race against robots is on: the Federal Trade Commission is offering $50,000 cash to anyone that can come up with a way to eliminate the insidious telemarketing robocall, it announced Thursday. While it may take a sizable workload, a good kill-switch for the spammy pre-recorded messages could put an end to the annoying overtures on the phone to enter a new sweepstakes, qualify for a new credit card, or get a new energy provider.

The FTC outlawed commercial telemarketing calls years ago in September 2009, but the legislation has done little to slow the flow of the pre-recorded messages ringing through to US phones. Because robocall systems are very complex and often internationally-oriented with layers of VoIP and spoofed caller IDs, the long arm of US law struggles to bring every last robocaller to justice. Hence, it's time for some good old-fashioned ingenuity.

Robocall crackdown solutions will be evaluated and scored in three basic areas. The first area, worth half the score, is how well it works: proof of its effectiveness, extensibility to different kinds of phones (mobile, wired landlines, and so on), and how easily it might be circumvented by telemarketers once it's rolled out. The second area, worth a quarter of the score, is how easy the solution would be to implement and use for consumers. The third area, also worth a quarter of the score, evaluates the idea based on how practical it is to deploy, with a high value placed on submissions that can be implemented immediately even if they are small-scale.

Acceptance of the solution doesn't guarantee it will be rolled out—we're reminded of the recommendation algorithm Netflix bought for $1 million and never used. Only teams with 10 employees or fewer will be eligible for the $50,000 prize; teams with more manpower will receive an "achievement award." The contest opens on October 25 at robocall.challenge.gov, and will run through January 17, 2013.

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston

It's easy, we've known how to solve it with email for ages: ban all anonymous phone calls. If the person on the other end is anonymous, reject the call.

It seems like this should be much easier to implement than it is with email, since people don't go around installing new phone lines or buying new sim cards they way they are continuously buying or re-installing software on machines/devices capable of sending email.

If someone who is not anonymous does a robocall, send the bastards to prison.

It's easy, we've known how to solve it with email for ages: ban all anonymous phone calls. If the person on the other end is anonymous, reject the call.

It seems like this should be much easier to implement than it is with email, since people don't go around installing new phone lines or buying new sim cards they way they are continuously buying or re-installing software on machines/devices capable of sending email.

If someone who is not anonymous does a robocall, send the bastards to prison.

The problem is that a large number of these calls are sent with false caller id information (and presumably false ANI information as well), which means it's not really possible for a regular person to make a useful report to law enforcement.

It's easy, we've known how to solve it with email for ages: ban all anonymous phone calls. If the person on the other end is anonymous, reject the call.

Easier said than done, and overlooks spoofed calls, false names, etc.

Any option involving overhauling the telephone system itself probably doesn't stand a chance of being implemented, and that's not even considering VOIP, which could be as hard to track as any connection behind a proxy.

I think focusing on the point where VOIP and PSTN are being bridged would be a start.

Force their credit card companies to ban any issuing banks that are servicing these scum.

I think, just as with email spam, the ultimate accountability tracks through the financial transaction. (The only class of spam that seems to side-step this is pump-and-dump stock scams, where a direct financial transaction with the recipient is not the goal.)

What bothers me the most is the sheer incompetence of some of the robocallers, or perhaps it might better be described as the lack of caring in their efforts. We have a landline that goes directly into an answering machine (comes free with our internet service) and the majority of calls are robocalls that don't even connect properly. The message starts part-way into the pitch, and then cuts off before there is any chance for us to 'Press 1 to speak to a representative'. In other words, they are a compete waste of a call, even if we were actually interested in the product.

They are simply nuisance calls; they don't accomplish what the supposed seller is trying to pitch, yet they still fill up our answering machine with cut-off messages. Just a complete waste of resources all around.

The targets of the calls may not be able to determine the origin of the calls, given all of the methods that they use to mask their identities, but the originating telcos can. Off-shore or not, any viable solution will have to include them detecting certain activities, much as ISPs are being pulled deeper and deeper into the detection and/or tracing of bad actors on the Internet. Perhaps that falls apart if VOIP is already their largest medium, but if they're using copper, well, they CAN be traced - if you can get the providers at the far end of the lines involved. In the US, I have to wonder how much of it sourced domestically.

In the comments some people felt bad for the guy who showed up in the truck but was turned away. "He's just an employee, not the owner who is responsible for all the calling" goes the explanation. While I agree to a certain extent, it's the owner who is ultimately exposing his employees to this kind of set-up, and if the owner is hiding from the customer and not being held responsible, the guys in the truck will ultimately have to decide if he wants to be part of this 'business'.

I think most of the ire directed at scammers like this (which includes spammers) is due to the chicken-shit nature of the top perpetrators who shield themselves from the consequences of their actions. There's the annoyance of being disturbed, but then there's also the violation of justice that pisses people off.

It should be fairly trivial for phone companies to detect bulk phone calls. If the same number or circuit or customer dials numbers continuously, there's a good chance that robodialing is involved.

That's true, but there are benign uses for robodialing too (for example, a power company calling customers to inform them of a planned outage). Detecting which calls are malicious vs. which are benign is not trivial, especially since the smarter malaicious guys try to make themselves sound benign.

It should be fairly trivial for phone companies to detect bulk phone calls. If the same number or circuit or customer dials numbers continuously, there's a good chance that robodialing is involved.

That's true, but there are benign uses for robodialing too (for example, a power company calling customers to inform them of a planned outage). Detecting which calls are malicious vs. which are benign is not trivial, especially since the smarter malaicious guys try to make themselves sound benign.

Unfortunately, they're the ones who make these rules in the first place.

I remember when the Do Not Call registry was first under discussion, and some savvy people predicted that the first thing the legislators crafting the bills would do is exempt themselves. Sure enough...

It's easy, we've known how to solve it with email for ages: ban all anonymous phone calls. If the person on the other end is anonymous, reject the call.

It seems like this should be much easier to implement than it is with email, since people don't go around installing new phone lines or buying new sim cards they way they are continuously buying or re-installing software on machines/devices capable of sending email.

If someone who is not anonymous does a robocall, send the bastards to prison.

You did read the part about spoofed numbers right? It's trivial to have caller id show a false name.

Force their credit card companies to ban any issuing banks that are servicing these scum.

I think, just as with email spam, the ultimate accountability tracks through the financial transaction. (The only class of spam that seems to side-step this is pump-and-dump stock scams, where a direct financial transaction with the recipient is not the goal.)

What bothers me the most is the sheer incompetence of some of the robocallers, or perhaps it might better be described as the lack of caring in their efforts. We have a landline that goes directly into an answering machine (comes free with our internet service) and the majority of calls are robocalls that don't even connect properly. The message starts part-way into the pitch, and then cuts off before there is any chance for us to 'Press 1 to speak to a representative'. In other words, they are a compete waste of a call, even if we were actually interested in the product.

They are simply nuisance calls; they don't accomplish what the supposed seller is trying to pitch, yet they still fill up our answering machine with cut-off messages. Just a complete waste of resources all around.

the recording starts part way in. the robo-call starts as soon as the call is answered, which means its "talking" while your outgoing message is playing, then starts recording when its finished.

and if all the recordings are clipped at the end as well, my guess is that that could very well be your machine as well. try calling and just talk till it hangs up on you.

It should be fairly trivial for phone companies to detect bulk phone calls. If the same number or circuit or customer dials numbers continuously, there's a good chance that robodialing is involved.

That's true, but there are benign uses for robodialing too (for example, a power company calling customers to inform them of a planned outage). Detecting which calls are malicious vs. which are benign is not trivial, especially since the smarter malaicious guys try to make themselves sound benign.

Yes, that is the rub. Perhaps an option would be to offer (even for a small subscription fee) an auto callback to your number if the phone company detects that you were bulk called (and ironically a robodialer would be ideally useful for this) and asks you if this was a legitimate call.

That's just off the top of my head. Determining intent and the amount of harassment would be the really hard part.

the recording starts part way in. the robo-call starts as soon as the call is answered, which means its "talking" while your outgoing message is playing, then starts recording when its finished.

That part is pretty clear. Nonetheless, millions, if not billions of people have answering machines. A legitimate robocaller should accommodate that fact of life. But here's the worst part...

Quote:

and if all the recordings are clipped at the end as well, my guess is that that could very well be your machine as well.

No, the calls drop even if I pick up five seconds into the recording. The robocallers blast out huge numbers of outgoing calls but don't have enough 'operators' in place to service all the pick-ups. Say they have one hundred people manning their phones. They make a thousand outgoing calls simultaneously knowing full well that they can't possibly service them all, so many get dropped even if someone does pick up. As long as they keep their hundred people busy, all the other incomplete calls are, quite literally, collateral damage.

It's a hugely wasteful system, but the robocallers are not the ones feeling the pain. It's a consequence of dirt-cheap VoIP calling and Caller-ID spoofing. (Much like email spamming.)

I would think a little investigating by the FCC or whatever agency could go a long way. At some point, unless it's a political ad, I'm guessing the robocall will try to initiate some kind of monetary transaction. That should be traceable to a large extent. So, set up a small phone bank with a couple thousand random numbers, put half on the Do Not Call list and stick a few people there to monitor them. When a robocall comes in, play along. Even give them money. Trace the transaction.

They have to have the desire to really get tough on these people once they find them. As tough as it takes to act as a deterrent.

It should be fairly trivial for phone companies to detect bulk phone calls. If the same number or circuit or customer dials numbers continuously, there's a good chance that robodialing is involved.

It's likely that these calls aren't being handled by a local exchange carrier. Further, I don't think any sort of phone line trace would really yield any useful data. It's too easy to spoof and misdirect. I think the only way to fight this thing is to somehow trace the transactions (e.g. investigators allowing a scammer to do their thing). Follow the money. [Edit: Beat by RolandKSP]

I suspect that a $50,000 prize and nothing offered for larger teams isn't enough to get competitors. What's with the size limit on the team. This contest strikes me more like it's intended to draw cheerleaders than to play ball - I mean, are they really trying for a solution or just trying to look like they care?

I would think a little investigating by the FCC or whatever agency could go a long way. At some point, unless it's a political ad, I'm guessing the robocall will try to initiate some kind of monetary transaction. That should be traceable to a large extent. So, set up a small phone bank with a couple thousand random numbers, put half on the Do Not Call list and stick a few people there to monitor them. When a robocall comes in, play along. Even give them money. Trace the transaction.

They have to have the desire to really get tough on these people once they find them. As tough as it takes to act as a deterrent.

Following the money has got to be the easiest way.

This seems like a good idea. There are robocalls that don't attempt to initiate a transaction though.

The robo-calls are triggered by the act of picking up the phone.. right? For cellphones it would be trivial to create a buffer.

When the phone is called have it initially act like the phone was answered(without the persons phone ringing), but after a few seconds delay start ringing like normal.. those seconds would trigger the robo-call which the buffer would then be able to detect it and then kill the phone call preventing the persons phone from ringing at all.

Tie it into the phones Contacts so that people in the contacts will not be buffered and also add a trusted phone number list for things like the schools who will always be using the same phone number. There you go.. robo-call for cellphones gone. For landlines you would have to add something something like that on to them.

Just thought of another way to do it... Have the buffer play a message ""Please Press 1 to complete you call." Make the number random.

I really don't like this requirement though: (For example, automated calls by political parties, charities, and health care providers, as well as reverse 911 calls, are not illegal robocalls.)

My solution gives complete control to the phones owner by default which means all those would have to be added by the owner. Apparently that could be a bad thing according the FCC.

Have a set of phone numbers (various regions, which can be routed to a single call center). Have people take the calls & pretend to be Mr or Mrs Smith and work with the caller to obtain enough information (possibly providing honeypot credit card numbers etc) so the calling company can be traced. Then hit èm with fines & seizures. Have a set of numbers on the DNC list so anyone calling those numbers can be fined even more.

Force their credit card companies to ban any issuing banks that are servicing these scum.

And explain to probably a few million people why their cards are no longer valid when the issuing banks are cut off. Or why legitimate businesses that use the bank can't do credit transactions.

Or does that kind of collateral damage not concern you?

That's called "incentive." If you were a bank and had thousands or millions of clients depending on you, you'd be pretty careful....ok, let me re-phrase that. If you were a bank, and you were suddenly unable to function because your ability to charge and receive funds was abruptly halted, it would certainly get your attention. Especially with a bunch of angry customers beating down your doors to get their money. And, even as we've seen in botnets, sometimes the only way to get rid of the damn thing is to cut the hosting ISPs off the Internet.

Just make some "honeypots". Being the government, they could make some fake people in various demographics. Put the phone numbers on the internet and wait for the calls to come in.

Then once you have recordings of incoming calls, cross reference them for matches with technology similar to YouTubes content id system. Similar records to multiple numbers would be a serious red flag... but really, a call to any of these fake numbers might be enough. The rest would have to be detective work.

Unfortunately, they're the ones who make these rules in the first place.

I remember when the Do Not Call registry was first under discussion, and some savvy people predicted that the first thing the legislators crafting the bills would do is exempt themselves. Sure enough...

Political calls should be on an opt-in basis. When you register to vote, you indicate whether or not you're receptive to receiving them.

Is there any way to get off of these political vultures' call list? My mother had very foolishly donated money to a small, local election (Republican) in her town and before you knew it, all nine of the Republicans who were running for president last year were spamming her with constant daily phone calls, both robocalls predicting a dire future for America if she didn't vote their way and live staffers demanding donations. Her name had been put on a willing-donor database.

I registered my mother's phone number with Stop Political Calls (stoppoliticalcalls.org) giving her a few months of blissful silence, but recently they started calling again. She's 82 and apparently these guys really know how to pressure the little old ladies to cough it up. I told her, "Know you know how annoying Fox News is to the rest of us," but she was not amused.

There are robocalls that don't attempt to initiate a transaction though.

Let's say for each scammer/spammer telemarketer with a phone, the computer dials a dozen calls out at one time, of which six get picked up on the other end, but the telemarketer only fields one of the calls that got picked up. That leaves five people wondering why nobody on the other end of the line attempted to initiate a transaction with them.

Check out 800notes.com, there are articles explaining how spammers & scammers work, plus you can do a search for numbers that call you to see who else they've called.

Unfortunately, they're the ones who make these rules in the first place.

I remember when the Do Not Call registry was first under discussion, and some savvy people predicted that the first thing the legislators crafting the bills would do is exempt themselves. Sure enough...

Political calls should be on an opt-in basis. When you register to vote, you indicate whether or not you're receptive to receiving them.

Is there any way to get off of these political vultures' call list? My mother had very foolishly donated money to a small, local election (Republican) in her town and before you knew it, all nine of the Republicans who were running for president last year were spamming her with constant daily phone calls, both robocalls predicting a dire future for America if she didn't vote their way and live staffers demanding donations. Her name had been put on a willing-donor database.

I registered my mother's phone number with Stop Political Calls (stoppoliticalcalls.org) giving her a few months of blissful silence, but recently they started calling again. She's 82 and apparently these guys really know how to pressure the little old ladies to cough it up. I told her, "Know you know how annoying Fox News is to the rest of us," but she was not amused.

Tip: There are phones that have a built-in blacklist capability. I got one because my phone companies blacklist was a joke.